• Hey Guest, want to be shortlisted for law firm open days? Start using our free Workspace.

TCLA Direct Training Contract Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

Hi everyone,

Recently received a PFO and in the general feedback (wasn't specific to my application), they said that students should not focus on one practice area when answering why the firm since they are a full-service firm, this pretty much contradicts what I have seen from many successful candidates who pinpoint a specifc practice area, a deal within that practice area etc, citing this as a reason for why the firm?

Thoughts?
 
  • ✅
Reactions: Abbie Whitlock
Hi everyone,

Recently received a PFO and in the general feedback (wasn't specific to my application), they said that students should not focus on one practice area when answering why the firm since they are a full-service firm, this pretty much contradicts what I have seen from many successful candidates who pinpoint a specifc practice area, a deal within that practice area etc, citing this as a reason for why the firm?

Thoughts?
Are you talking about Reed Smith’s recent general feedback? It sounds like the general feedback I got after getting rejected from their DTC. I was surprised by this feedback for the same reasons as you are. But then apparently theres another way to do this - e.g u could talk about a second practice that’s related - like PE and M&A? For example I did PE and Football for the Reed Smith’s q on “a news that interests u and whats the impact on RS?”. Anyway, I got rejected - but I’m not sure if it’s bcuz of this q.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaemonBlackFyre
Are you talking about Reed Smith’s recent general feedback? It sounds like the general feedback I got after getting rejected from their DTC. I was surprised by this feedback for the same reasons as you are. But then apparently theres another way to do this - e.g u could talk about a second practice that’s related - like PE and M&A? For example I did PE and Football for the Reed Smith’s q on “a news that interests u and whats the impact on RS?”. Anyway, I got rejected - but I’m not sure if it’s bcuz of this q.
Yeah i'm referencing RS's feedback, i specifically spoke about Shipping (generic ik) but i have a very close connection with that type of work so I thought it would be fine as it links to me very specifically. I referenced PE and Restructuring and Insolvency as practice areas for the issues affecting one of RS industry groups with the main issue being rising gilt yields affecting the financial services industy group.

I scored 22 on the Amberjack and i also have a low 2:1 (62%) supplemented by a master's degree at a RG with multiple first class marks (4), my written answers were strong having been reviewed by trainees, so im just going to put it down to my academics not being competitive enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gioiabwear Yong
Yeah i'm referencing RS's feedback, i specifically spoke about Shipping (generic ik) but i have a very close connection with that type of work so I thought it would be fine as it links to me very specifically. I referenced PE and Restructuring and Insolvency as practice areas for the issues affecting one of RS industry groups with the main issue being rising gilt yields affecting the financial services industy group.

I scored 22 on the Amberjack and i also have a low 2:1 (62%) supplemented by a master's degree at a RG with multiple first class marks (4), my written answers were strong having been reviewed by trainees, so im just going to put it down to my academics not being competitive enough.
I’m not tooooo sure about the academics bit - a Masters degree@RG and a 2:1 undergrad should place u in a much better position than most applicants tho …
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaemonBlackFyre
Yeah i'm referencing RS's feedback, i specifically spoke about Shipping (generic ik) but i have a very close connection with that type of work so I thought it would be fine as it links to me very specifically. I referenced PE and Restructuring and Insolvency as practice areas for the issues affecting one of RS industry groups with the main issue being rising gilt yields affecting the financial services industy group.

I scored 22 on the Amberjack and i also have a low 2:1 (62%) supplemented by a master's degree at a RG with multiple first class marks (4), my written answers were strong having been reviewed by trainees, so im just going to put it down to my academics not being competitive enough.
Might be VI?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaemonBlackFyre
I’m not tooooo sure about the academics bit - a Masters degree@RG and a 2:1 undergrad should place u in a much better position than most applicants tho …
i'm pretty certain most applicants have a better undergrad then 62%, although it could have been my VI, i think my written answers were strong because i always pass first stage and i'd say i'm good at the writing strong answers.
 
It's definitely the VI because I think they already considered your academics and work beforehand to give the assessment and VI in the first place, but that's what I believe.
I think that was probably like an automatic benchmark, like having a minimum 2:1, at this stage befiore the AC, the academics were probably more closely scrutinised, it specifically says in the email ''We have now had the opportunity to assess your High Potential Legal Assessment, Video Interview, and written submission. Your responses were reviewed manually by a member of the Early Careers Team' - this to me, suggests they have only now looked at my entire profile holistically.
 
So one of those 3 needs addressing
The reason why i believe it wasn't the VI was because people were getting PFO's before the written app stage, which suggests the VI needed to be of a good standard. Saying this though, it may be the case that their Amberjack score wasn't good enough, although mine was only 22.

It could certainly be the case that my VI was the reason for the PFO, but when i look at my notes and the general feedback they give and just my experience with multiple AC's at the big firms, I personally think it was good enough.
 
The reason why i believe it wasn't the VI was because people were getting PFO's before the written app stage, which suggests the VI needed to be of a good standard. Saying this though, it may be the case that their Amberjack score wasn't good enough, although mine was only 22.

It could certainly be the case that my VI was the reason for the PFO, but when i look at my notes and the general feedback they give and just my experience with multiple AC's at the big firms, I personally think it was good enough.
pretty much because of your essay, i knew ppl who got rejected because apart from shipping/transportation practice, they mentioned life science. For example, at an insight day, grad rec told the life science sector in London office is so small, not like in the US so they expect candidates to mention other sectors like energy, finance and media/entertainment.

Are you talking about Reed Smith’s recent general feedback? It sounds like the general feedback I got after getting rejected from their DTC. I was surprised by this feedback for the same reasons as you are. But then apparently theres another way to do this - e.g u could talk about a second practice that’s related - like PE and M&A? For example I did PE and Football for the Reed Smith’s q on “a news that interests u and whats the impact on RS?”. Anyway, I got rejected - but I’m not sure if it’s bcuz of this q.
Yeah i'm referencing RS's feedback, i specifically spoke about Shipping (generic ik) but i have a very close connection with that type of work so I thought it would be fine as it links to me very specifically. I referenced PE and Restructuring and Insolvency as practice areas for the issues affecting one of RS industry groups with the main issue being rising gilt yields affecting the financial services industy group.

I scored 22 on the Amberjack and i also have a low 2:1 (62%) supplemented by a master's degree at a RG with multiple first class marks (4), my written answers were strong having been reviewed by trainees, so im just going to put it down to my academics not being competitive enough.
For finance, i don't think their sector has advised many PE restructuring or sport sponsorship, instead they advised institutions and regulatory side like crypto, fintech, etc.
 
pretty much because of your essay, i knew ppl who got rejected because apart from shipping/transportation practice, they mentioned life science. For example, at an insight day, grad rec told the life science sector in London office is so small, not like in the US so they expect candidates to mention other sectors like energy, finance and media/entertainment.



For finance, i don't think their sector has advised many PE restructuring or sport sponsorship, instead they advised institutions and regulatory side like crypto, fintech, etc.
So the question was 'Focusing on one of Reed Smith`s five Industry Groups, what current issues, aside from the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), do you think will impact this sector? What opportunities or challenges could this present Reed Smith or our clients?

I chose financial services as one of the five industry groups to focus on, the main issue i referenced was rising gilt yields.

I said for RS PE clients , a key challenge is the increased cost of new acquisitions due to reliance on leverage debt. I also said an opportunity would be for RS to advise these PE clients on exiting mature investments to free up capital for new acquisitions.

I also mentioned how rising gilt yields will affect the demand for lending services from banks as companies take a risk conscious approach to borrowing - as well as some distressed borrowers being unable to repay loans, potentially leading to insolvency. RS advises the top ten banks in the US, UK, and EU so it is an opportunity for the restructuring and insolvency team to advise on debt recovery etc

So the PE point is separate to the R&I point.

Ultimately, I think this answers the question fairly well. - Ofcourse, i would always appreciate feedback!
 
Hey!

I am really sorry to hear about Mayer Brown - particularly as it was your strongest Amberjack result. I can completely understand why that feels frustrating and confusing.

I've shared a few thoughts below (although with the caveat that none of us can know for sure).

Firstly, I wouldn't jump to concluding that this is a UK work experience issue, as plenty of firms value international experience and I think that internships + paralegal experience abroad can be a real strength to your application if framed well. Equally, I probably wouldn't fixate too much on not having a 2:1 in every module if you still achieved a 2:1 overall (unless a firm specifically says otherwise, as I know some are slightly stricter).

Personally, I found that DTCs and VSs can sometimes reward/value slightly different things. VS processes often give you more opportunities to demonstrate potential over multiple stages, whereas DTC applications can sometimes be much more compressed and competitive at the application stage as firms are trying to assess whether someone is TC-level immediately.

You also mention that your drafting hasn't changed, which actually might be worth revisiting slightly. If your VS style worked as it focused more on potential, curiosity, and exploration, DTC answers sometimes need a slightly different emphasis - i.e. more evidence on readiness, clearer commercial judgement, stronger examples of ownership, and more direct articulation of why you'd succeed as a trainee.

I also wouldn't discount things like timing and cohort effects too much. If you have previously been progressing well in VS processes, this would suggest that your underlying application skills are stronger than it currently feels, and it might be things out of your control that are causing the outcome.

If I were you, I would perhaps treat this more as a diagnostic exercise than evidence that something is fundamentally wrong. It might be helpful to compare a couple of your strongest VS applications against your DTC ones and see whether there are any differences in positioning - for example, whether your DTC answers lean more towards listing achievements rather than showing impact, or whether your answers have become a bit too polished and lost some of the specificity that made them stand out.

From your post, you come across as reflective and thoughtful rather than someone who is completely missing the mark - therefore, I wouldn't assume there's an obvious issue causing all of this! Sometimes an application cycle is just more competitive or the timing is off, and the best thing you can do is just tweak a few things rather than trying to overhaul everything.

Resilience and continuous improvement are really key traits that are essential to succeed in this process - based on what you've written, I'm sure you are more than capable of receiving an offer. Wishing you the best of luck with whatever you apply for next :)
Thanks Abbie!! That's brilliant advice, thanks for articulating what I couldn't. Funnily enough, I actually received RS AC invite later that day. I think I was subconsciously changing up my writing style then too since what I was doing previously clearly wasn't working. Either way, your message gave me a real boost, so thanks for your insight :)
 
So the question was 'Focusing on one of Reed Smith`s five Industry Groups, what current issues, aside from the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), do you think will impact this sector? What opportunities or challenges could this present Reed Smith or our clients?

I chose financial services as one of the five industry groups to focus on, the main issue i referenced was rising gilt yields.

I said for RS PE clients , a key challenge is the increased cost of new acquisitions due to reliance on leverage debt. I also said an opportunity would be for RS to advise these PE clients on exiting mature investments to free up capital for new acquisitions.

I also mentioned how rising gilt yields will affect the demand for lending services from banks as companies take a risk conscious approach to borrowing - as well as some distressed borrowers being unable to repay loans, potentially leading to insolvency. RS advises the top ten banks in the US, UK, and EU so it is an opportunity for the restructuring and insolvency team to advise on debt recovery etc

So the PE point is separate to the R&I point.

Ultimately, I think this answers the question fairly well. - Ofcourse, i would always appreciate feedback!
just jumping on this - that feedback was generic. also got rejected, similar stats as you though I did my masters abroad ultimately and I got into top unis so if it was good enough for them it should be good enough for a law firm (with the exception of the ones placing emphasis on extremely high grades (cough Slaughter). I did my answer on energy transition and decarbonisation (my general motivation was also shipping/transportation and music since it aligns with my background and interests) and basically analysed how it influences them as being a firm that only represents policy holders.

Either way, the feedback received fully contradicted what I have written so I would not put too much emphasis into that.

I think your answer sounds good so I would not be worried about that, it comes down to a lot of luck and numbers and what resonates with the person reading your file.